Autism is one of humanity’s most mysterious afflictions. The disorder, which can hinder communication, empathy and other social skills on a spectrum ranging from mild to severe, affects as many as 1 in 68 children born in the United States, according to the Centers for Disease Control, up from 1 in 150 at the turn of the century. No one knows exactly what has caused the increase, but one researcher is pointing her finger at a chemical called glyphosate, more widely known as the active ingredient in the ubiquitous weed killer Roundup.
Agribusiness giant Monsanto introduced Roundup Ready soybeans to the United States in 1994, which are genetically modified to resist glyphosate so farmers can spray their fields with the weed killer without damaging their crops. Today, some 90 percent of soy and corn grown in the country are Roundup Ready.
Via: Marcin Balcerzak
Now Dr. Stephanie Seneff, senior research scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, is sounding the alarm bell. Seneff claims that as many as half of all children born in the United States by 2025 will be on the autism spectrum, and Roundup is the reason why.
“The way glyphosate works is that it interrupts the shikimate pathway, a metabolic function in plants that allows them to create essential amino acids,” Seneff explained at a recent Autism conference. “When this path is interrupted, the plants die. Human cells don’t have a shikimate pathway so scientists and researchers believed that exposure to glyphosate would be harmless.”
However, she claims that the chemical still effects humans even if it doesn’t act on our bodies directly.
“The problem is that bacteria DO have a shikimate pathway and we have millions of good bacteria in our guts — our ‘gut flora,’” Seneff continued. “These bacteria are essential to our health. Our gut isn’t just responsible for digestion, but also for our immune system. When glyphosate gets in our systems, it wrecks our gut and as a result our immune system.”
Seneff also says that her research has shown that glyphosate can inhibit liver function, which could be an explanation for high rates of vitamin D deficiency. She further claims that the chemical could be implicated in diminished kidney function, celiac disease and other gastrointestinal problems.
“[The autism rate] has come up from 1 in 10,000 in 1970 — so that is already an incredibly alarming change,” Seneff said to Next News Network. “I got worried eight years ago when I was seeing it rising, and people were saying, ‘Oh, it’s just more reporting, more diagnosis’ — that’s a way to hide the evidence.”
That’s not the only alarming data that has come to light recently about Roundup. Earlier this spring, the World Health Organization came to a consensus that glyphosate is probably carcinogenic to humans after an extensive review of the evidence and scientific record. Other studies suggest that pesticide exposure in pregnant women can put children at risk of birth defects leading to learning and behavioral impairments.
While some industry-touted studies claim that Roundup is safe for humans, Seneff says that there simply hasn’t been enough research. “The glyphosate is being soaked up by the plants and getting into the food system,” she said, “and the U.S. government is doing very little monitoring to even see if that’s true.”
http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/glyphosate.asp You should really try to come up with original fear mongering if you’re going to even pretend to be publishing anything. Lazy.
I missed where you explained the connection between glyphosphate and autism.
The full article is here: http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/glyphosate/Seneff_AutismOne_2014.pdf
Instead of saying mean things to each other we should all critically read and think, check the facts carefully, and stop the poisoning of our planet. Medical doctors accept the term Practice of Medicine because they know time provides more evidence. It is not that truth changes but that we grow wiser.
Doctors use the term “PRACTICE” so when they screw up they cab say, “well medicine is just a practice…….” Well if you are practicing on me why the hell do you charge like you know what you are doing?
Firstly, I do believe that all essential services should be free to all citizens–they pay enough in taxes. However, on the issue here, every discipline, not just medicine, has been evolving and improving throughout the history of mankind. Medical doctors went from stealing bodies in order to explore cadavers and
Firstly, I do believe that all essential services to citizens should be free as they pay enough in taxes. However on the issue here, all disciplines, not just medicine has improved throughout history as we develop more knowledge. We went from guess work based on symptoms to x-rays then MRI’s etc. Some doctors are better at diagnosis and prognosis than others but they all do their best. I am not a medical doctor although from a medical family and have a degree in psychology–but the agenda here is getting the trans-national corporations to stop indiscriminate dumping of toxins on the planet as it is definitely causing disorders and diseases of all kinds–including neurological disorders and mutations in human beings–let us stick to this issue, so something can be done to stop not just autism (now one in 68 and still rising – CDC). No point competing and arguing with each other–we are all victims of these toxins. I wish you all the best in life, John. None of us have all the answers–we all suffer, but we have, and can again, get together and improve things on the earth for all of us and the generations that will follow.
“getting the trans-national corporations to stop indiscriminate dumping of toxins on the planet”
Research the way they first thought of putting fluoride in the public water systems across the U.S. Originally, when first discovered, it was considered a toxin. It was a by-product of the mining industry and they had no effective way of getting rid of it without polluting. When they started studying it’s effects on humans they found out that it takes people’s initiative away from them and creates people that follow the crowd and do as they are told by authority figures. In addition it also causes seizures. One of the first and foremost places they tested it was in pre WWII Germany. As you can see the result was everyone following the Fuhrer (leader) and doing as they were told. The U.S. decided a convenient way to dispose of fluoride was to add it to the public water supply under the guise of it decreasing cavities in human teeth. With the added benefit of it being a low key psychotropic substance causing people to do as they are told, it was an easy sell. Not only did the mining industry find a way to eliminate their toxic waste the government actually buys it from the for profit corporations to add to our water supply. The fact that it also causes seizures is just an added plus for the medical industry so they can not only treat the symptoms but receive government grants to research to find out what’s causing the seizures. Win, Win, Win for multi-national corporations, big government and big pharma.
John, have you read the surgical disclaimers you sign before surgery?
At 66 years old, knock on wood, I’ve not had any surgery or for that matter a broken bone. So to answer your question……NO. Enlighten me.
““The way glyphosate works is that it interrupts the shikimate pathway, a metabolic function in plants that allows them to create essential amino acids,The problem is that bacteria DO have a shikimate pathway and we have millions of good bacteria in our guts — our ‘gut flora,’” Seneff continued. “These bacteria are essential to our health. Our gut isn’t just responsible for digestion, but also for our immune system. When glyphosate gets in our systems, it wrecks our gut and as a result our immune system.”
So many children diagnosed with ASD have digestive and auto immune problems affecting their overall health and organs. The brain, our most complex organ, has so many intricate areas (emotion, communication) and pathways where the mechanics are vulnerable. To believe that the massive amount of chemicals we end up with in our bodies from chemically produced foods is not impacting our ability to function fully is naive. Combine that with genetic predispositions and we are igniting a range of neurological problems.
“The way glyphosate works is that it
interrupts the shikimate pathway, a metabolic function in plants that
allows them to create essential amino acids,” Seneff explained at a
recent Autism conference. “When this path is interrupted, the plants
die. Human cells don’t have a shikimate pathway so scientists and
researchers believed that exposure to glyphosate would be harmless.”
However, she claims that the chemical still effects humans even if it doesn’t act on our bodies directly.
“The problem is that bacteria DO have a
shikimate pathway and we have millions of good bacteria in our guts —
our ‘gut flora,’” Seneff continued. “These bacteria are essential to our
health. Our gut isn’t just responsible for digestion, but also for our
immune system. When glyphosate gets in our systems, it wrecks our gut
and as a result our immune system.”
Seneff also says that her research has shown that glyphosate can inhibit liver function, which could be an explanation for high rates of vitamin D deficiency.
She further claims that the chemical could be implicated in diminished
kidney function, celiac disease and other gastrointestinal problems.
Without Vitamin D, we get very sick. It is ESSENTIAL. Your gut health is ESSENTIAL. Your immune system is ESSENTIAL. Your liver is ESSENTIAL.
Glyphosphate is like a salt. It is ionic and absorbed into plants where it inhibits a critical enzyme for the plant to grow. Bacteria in our gut – and yes there is a lot of it.. is critical to the breaking down of food and releasing beneficial nutrients esp amino acids. You know that simply running very low on vitamin B1 (Thiamine) causes severe brain damage called wernicke korsakoff syndrome. Imagine a cascade of nutrients not available. Further, bad bacteria such as Candida (yeast) releases a ton of toxins and actual neurotransmitters. For example candida can make you crave sugar like a meth addict craving. It also lowers your immune systems function to protect itself, and the net result can be either an over or under active immune system (auto immune diseases or cancer). Glyphosphate also does not break down when Monsanto say’s it does. The entire ag industry works on the premise that the chemical is gone in three days. Broken down to what ? we don’t know. It loses it’s effect in soil after three days but.. it persists in soil and plants and animals and milk etc for a very long time and whilst it’s effects are not as obvious – it is clearly screwing us up. We are a very sick population now and it just so happens there is money to be made from that.
This is replete with assumption piled onto innuendo wrapped up in conclusions unsupported by actual evidence. In short its drivel,
This is merely a synopsis. Read the full article. Then, read the studies which are fully credited. Hardly drivel.
The trolls don’t read full articles, and they certainly don’t read scientific journals. They just take snippets, and then create a cynical dialogue that makes them feel better about their lives, while maintaining the delusion of being smarter than everyone else. Trolls don’t have PhDs, and they wouldn’t know evidence if it was dropped on their house.
You might want to take at look at my latest post?
Sorry but my evaluation stands as stated, please see my latest post.
You do know some big words
Wow, you swayed me with your argument.
Do I really need a reason not to ingest chemicals? Why do it if you don’t have to?
Well, seeing as the human body has this inconvenient requirement of breaking chemical bonds between carbohydrates, proteins, and/or fat for energy, I imagine a reason not to ingest chemicals would have to be rather compelling. Personally, I ingest chemicals not because of some overriding desire to satisfy the second law of thermodynamics by converting the complex macromolecules of what I eat into my feces, but because I have been genetically programmed by billions of years of evolution to find donuts scrumdiddlyumptious.
Chubby, I hope you continue to be well in spite of what you are eating and all the toxins we are dumping on the planet that are causing mutation, disorders, illnesses and death to plant, animal, and human life. All the best.
Yeah defend the poisoning of America. Did you miss the part where Roundup affects gut bacteria? You did. Defend a multi-billion dollar corporation that is poisoning us. Jeez!
You’re missing the point. The point is whether it actually causes autism or not. The study can only show correlation. It does not show causation. You do not need a PhD to figure that out. Did you know that shark attacks are correlated with ice cream sales? I bet you think the evil ice cream corporations are to blame.
gustavmahler: They are missing more than that–they are missing their heath and soon their lives–pity.
And post the link to your PhD in biology.
Two main points here:
1. I don’t think she understands that correlation does not equal causation. The increase of organic food sales is synonymous with increasing autism diagnoses. Link? Probably not.
2. Being a hairdresser is a probable carcinogen according to the IARC, in the same 2-A category as glyphosate. caffeine, acrylamide (potatoes) are among others people ingest knowingly and don’t bat an eyelash.
Not sure about others, but I am not putting on my tin foil hat anytime soon.
Um, yeah, pretty sure she understands correlation and causation- two words you just learned, that she became intimately familiar with during her PhD studies. The problem here is the article not the scholar. People that only base their judgments on what they borrow from press articles are not the ones to judge understanding.
She definitely understands statistics enough to know that if she did them properly her results would be a lot less interesting.
Why? How do you know?
Going off memory of reading this a month ago: She used a Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient for the study, which is a very basic correlation test. Does X correlate with Y? Her test showed that as Glyphosate usage increased IN GENERAL, that Autism prevalence rates increased IN GENERAL. There is no 1 to 1 link between patient’s Glyphosate usage and patient’s diagnosis of Autism. There are no controls. There is just a simple correlation that has very little meaning. There are lots of other factors that have increased in general over this same time period. You could run the same Pearson’s Correlation to point a finger and say Starbucks franchises are the cause of Autism, or Glyphosate usage is the cause of ISIS. There’s no casual link, nor was there any control for Type 1 error, which basically means that if you test enough random numbers, you will find correlations. How many illnesses did she test Glyphosate against until she found a correlation? For all we know, she ran this test 200 times until she got a hit. If you take a random number generator and divide the numbers into two groups and run enough statistics, eventually you will find some differences.
Look, Glyphosate is probably bad, but let’s re-frame these results as “hey look, these things correlate, maybe we should conduct some proper research studies before we post articles that give parents of autistic children hope that they can just start eating organic and everything will be better now”.
Sort of. She’s one of these people I can’t make up my mind if she is a crank or someone worth paying attention to. I ran into her doing research on statins and side effects.
While your description is probably petty close to what she does, she doesn’t just exhaustively test all the things out there, but narrows what she compares based on a reasonably informed vector to be measured.
In the case of statins, she went around trying to get an answer of how they work, which shouldn’t be as hard as it is. Then she came up with a list of conditions/illnesses known to involve those systems failing to work normally in a manner in which it could be argued statins alters their behavior. Then she did statistical comparisons of the general population receiving medical services exhibiting those issues, and the rate at which statin users exhibit those issues. The numbers show there isn’t just coincidence at work, but what she did is not sufficient to reach the conclusions she supposes. But it’s not outright tin foil hat stuff. And her critique of the current body of work on the side of “statins are awesome and can do no harm” research is pretty sound.
The Glyphosate number crunching, which I ran into a while ago because she was already on my radar, doesn’t work as well isn’t, IMO, done as well as the statin work. In part because we don’t have a very good metrics for mapping your gut flora, and then mapping that to what ailments you have.
She makes the claim that she wants to apply statistically vetted system analysis to other fields, which she does do, and at least to me it looks like the issues she brings up would be a pretty decent set of testable topics for research. She purports that spurring such stuff, rather than coming to conclusions she says are factual is what she is trying to do, but for someone doing that, she does get awfully “look at me” at regular intervals and seems to make some very significant statements without qualification or ambiguity.
So….
Do you have any idea how to do statistics? Why do you think a complicated test should be run, when a simple and time-honored one will suffice? She’s not just p-hacking the results, she’s offering a mechanism to support her theory.
Because you can’t conclude causation with correlation coefficient.
“hope that they can just start eating organic and everything will be better now”
For the most part once the damage, especially to the brain and nerves, is done, it’s done. Most people probably realize this, but if there’s any indication that some inorganic product has caused/is causing an affliction wouldn’t parents want to know that that might be the cause and if possible avoid using that product in the future? Wouldn’t it be wise to stop using what causes damage? Some affects may not be reversible yet others very well may be. Stopping it’s use can only be beneficial and just possibly a different diet may improve the condition. I’m not saying Round Up is causing autism, I’m just saying that people should have an informed choice rather than waiting for Big Agriculture/Mansanto/CDC to police their own actions knowing full well that would not be in their best interests.
My main point is just the false hope. It’s pretty well known that Autism has a large genetic component and is improved by early intervention. You just want families saying, “oh, I don’t need treatment, I just need to start eating organic.”
I didn’t say people don’t need treatment or eating organic is what I want, I said, after having the best information, wouldn’t it be wise to allow people the informed decision as to whether they should consume certain products. The fact of the matter is, there are certain ailments of modern society that never or rarely existed in past centuries. The only reasonable conclusion is that some things in modern society are causing these illnesses to increase. We have to look at what modern advances are causing modern illnesses.
I agree that people should have access the best information. This isn’t it.
Round Up is just a brand name–talk about the ingredients in Round Up–otherwise, we get Round Up off the market, as Ontario banned weed killers and the manufacturers just put the same ingredients in another product, package it differently, give it another name and off it goes again. I had this conversation with the minister of Environment in Canada two years ago.
The book, Autism: The teratogen Fallout (www.agentorangecanada.com; http:autismfallout .com covers agents such as dioxin (used in agent orange to destroy the jungles of Vietnam so that U.S. forces could detect the VietCong , but they also spray it ezperimentally in
Seems to me that if the physiological pathway has been demonstrated (which it has) and that epidemiological evidence has been demonstrated (which it has) that more years of studying is the exact play the corpse-orations hope for. Again, it seems that people of the USA (“United Stations”, we call them from the non USA parts of English America) seem to believe they are differently constructed than all the other humans of the industrialized world (Roundup = useful and even drinkable, more guns make us safer, etc).
Glyphosate is a neurotoxin that builds up and lasts in the human body, all lifeforms and ecosystems. It is NOT a good idea any more, even if we once believed the Agent Orange and Roundup manufacturer some time ago before the evidence came clear.
Yes, I am a scientist.
Her PhD is in Computer science and her background is in that category. She follows a long list (FoodbBabe comes to mind) of people breaking the habit of their area of focus to try to explain their and other people’s mental and physical issues easily, which a doctor in the field of medicine, microbiology, etc. would tell you is not so simple. I have read the study, and agree with mrmars below, that it is indeed complete drivel. Just for fun, below is the graph I hinted to in my previous comment. Though a correlation is visible, the two are not mutual. Not only is she suggesting you shouldn’t use sunglasses or sunscreen (which is foolish), She suggests you should eat organic. She left the graph below conveniently out of her other several graphs where she attempts to make links from every chemical compound to autism. Blake certainly understands that it is about fear-mongering.
Dr. Seneff’s B.S. degree was in “Biophysics”. I believe that gives her more than enough of a knowledge base to be able to do adequate research and make the statement’s she is making.
Here’s her biography from http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/ : Stephanie Seneff is a Senior Research Scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory. She received the B.S. degree in Biophysics in 1968, the M.S. and E.E. degrees in Electrical Engineering in 1980, and the Ph.D degree in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science in 1985, all from
MIT. For over three decades, her research interests have always been at the intersection of biology and computation: developing a computational model for the human auditory system, understanding human language so as to develop algorithms and systems for human computer interactions, as well as applying natural language processing (NLP) techniques to gene predictions. She has
published over 170 refereed articles on these subjects, and has been invited to give keynote speeches at several international conferences. She has also supervised numerous Master’s and PhD theses at MIT. In 2012, Dr. Seneff was elected Fellow of the International Speech and Communication Association (ISCA).
In recent years, Dr. Seneff has focused her research interests back towards biology. She is concentrating mainly on the relationship between nutrition and health. Since 2011, she has written over a dozen papers (7 as first author) in various medical and health-related journals on topics such as modern day diseases (e.g., Alzheimer, autism, cardiovascular diseases), analysis and search of databases of drug side effects using NLP techniques, and
the impact of nutritional deficiencies and environmental toxins on human health.
A PhD is not proof against supporting idiotic conclusions from cherry-picked data. She has a history of supporting bullshit.
“She has a history of supporting bullshit.” – What kind of BS statement is that ?
How about “Numerous studies by leading Universities have shown that Dr. Seneff has a veracity rating above 97.
People will never understand that whenever someone very knowledgeable even hints at attacking the profits of an international conglomerate, they will be slandered as a quack and ruined as a professional. In the 1920’s a prominent doctor said that cancer is caused by viruses. They made a laughing stock out of him, ruined his career and labeled him a quack for the rest of his life. Now days the medical establishment will admit that SOME cancers are caused by viruses – like hepatitis A,B &C and HPV, – yet if asked the blanket question “do viruses cause cancer?”, they will say NO viruses don’t cause cancer. All the new cancer treatments seem to rely on heavy doses of anti-viral medications. Just read Wikipedia’s article on viruses, especially the focus on RNA retroviruses, and it clearly shows the process viruses use to (more than likely) cause ALL cancers. They label carcinogens (chemicals, radiation, etc.) as cancer causing elements but they are actually only agents that cause the DNA chains to break and allow viruses to mix their own DNA with human DNA to create the monster we all know as cancer.
It would probably be best to experiment on 1000 or more pregnant women using glyphosate and have appropriate control groups. Another experiment would remove or render useless certain gut bacteria and attempt to directly prove the theory that gut bacteria are involved. Until we can do that (and in the world we are headed for, participation will not be voluntary) we’re going to have to rely on proving a correlation.
I don’t think she’s trying to say that the lack of one gut bacteria or the prevalence of another is the cause of autism. She says that the change in gut bacteria is responsible for a change in the immune system and may be a possible contributing factor, not a direct result.
Well, I don’t want to nit-pick her theory, as long as you agree that experimenting on humans until we can prove what causes autism by forcing the production of autistic babies is a good thing.
Please don’t put stuff your crazy uncle sent you via fwd:fwd:fwd: as if it was fact. First off, acrylamide is not found in potatoes, it’s a substance that gets created when they are fried in oil. Not the same thing. Secondly, caffeine is not considered a carcinogen in the numerous studies on that subject. It has even been shown to inhibit some tumor types.
People like you deserve the poisoning you get from the GMO and glyphosate.
The problem with evaluating drivel like this is that its a god-awful consumer of time, and one that you can almost be sure -a priori – will have little real impact on the “discussion.”. People with a real background in the area (i.e. expertise ) really don’t need to see a detailed critique as they can readily detect B.S. at the outset with little need to delve into the detail because their expertise allows them to spot pseudoscience when they see it, its a result of their training. Those who need to be convinced that garbage is garbage on the other hand require a detailed rebuttal precisely because their background in the area is lacking. This, by the way, is not meant to be personally demeaning in any way (honest). No one has expertise in everything. I certainly don’t. What I do have is a Ph.D. in biology with over 30 years of teaching experience at the college level including cell and molecular biology. “Teachers” don’t do research (those who can’t do, teach, huh?), but when I did research early in my career, including a stint at Cornell (not too shabby) my research dealt with the cell biology and biochemistry of fungi that cause plant disease. My training in Plant Pathology included lots of material, discussions and exposure to the topic of genetic engineering of plants to resist pathogens and herbivores. Friends and colleagues that I still interact with are doing this sort of research right now, or have in the past. None work for Monsanto, but ALL, I suspect, would find Dr. Seneff’s “research” as lacking as I do. I’d bet money on that.
Dr. Seneff has, according to her Vita and information listed on the MIT CSAIL website, a strong record of research of which she can be justifiably proud, but it’s mostly involved with the interfacing of language with computer technology. How one segues from that to being an “expert” in biochemistry and molecular biology isn’t clear to me at all.
The history of Biology includes lots of examples of people with expertise in one area who got themselves into trouble when they use their reputation in that area as a license to make unfounded pronouncements in another area in which they have little real experience. This even extends to Nobel laureates, hence we have Dr. Linus Pauling and his assertions that vitamin C is an immune booster, etc., in spite of a lack of supporting experimental evidence. Similarly, Dr. Seneff’s recent articles in the “Entropy” On-line Journal (for physics?) are listed as “reviews.” How does one get to write reviews in areas where one has no established experience? That’s a new one on me. Upon examination her “reviews” are little more than the findings of others loosely strung together in highly questionable ways to arrive at conclusions about human health that in fact are little more than elaborate hypotheses with no obvious direct experimental support. Pigs exist and birds can fly; no one would refute these assertions, but if I connect the topics and assert that I believe pigs can fly, I had better provide some experimental verifiable evidence that goes well beyond the mere existence of pigs and flight.
A recent paper that included a critique of Dr. Seneff’s “work” in the Journal of Medical Toxicology (2014) 10:194-201, titled, “Tempest in a Tea Pot: How did the Public Conversation
on Genetically Modified Crops Drift so far from the Facts?,” by Daniel A. Goldstein included this quote:
“One can also get traction simply by spinning unfounded theories. For example, Samsel and Seneff [67], neither of whom has any background in the biological sciences, published an article in a physics journal (Entropy) arguing that GM crops and associated pesticides act via “exogenous semiotic entropy” and lead to most of the dis- eases and conditions associated with a Western diet, including gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depres- sion, autism, infertility, cancer, and Alzheimer’s disease. Their arguments were quickly rejected and derided, but not before they gained a large amount of press and provided support to the many unfounded fears of GMO’s.”
Dr. Seneff’s “research” is not research in the full sense of the word, not even close, and in the absence of expertise in biology I fail to see how her unsupported hypotheses – regardless of the story they seem to weave – can be taken seriously. The layman may be impressed by the shear volume of information she strings together (one pdf file I looked at had over 100 PowerPoint slides in it) but volume is no substitute for experimental verification of all of those questionable connections she makes. Any one of those connections would take a significant experimental effort (years of work) to support, but those with little actual lab experience of course wouldn’t understand that.
None of this is intended as an ad-hominem attack on Dr. Seneff or her colleagues ( though some seem to have equally questionable relevant credentials). Science is not designed to be a personally friendly undertaking. Scientists are trained to be super-critical of their own work as well as that of others. In this area if one has the audacity to put forth unsubstantiated drivel, harsh responses are inevitable, and in a very real sense required.
Great post. It should be noted that watching a documentary on Netflix or reading a ‘study’ are not substitutes for years of education, theory and practice. Unfortunately, the information age has really evolved into the mis-information age. I am glad to see you deconstruct her points and indicate that without having a background in the necessary category of study, it is simple to take things at face value and rather convenient to believe that everyone is out to get you, except the smallholder farmer or the snake oil salesman.
I have eight earned degrees that include two doctorates–and I have to admit I still do not know everything–not even enough. BUT one and one will always make two. The proof of the pudding is in the eating and people are not dumb–they know what happened before their illness. You do not have to be a mechanic to DRIVE a car. Toxins such as dioxin and others ARE POISONING THE PLANET AND CAUSING AUTISM AND OTHER NEUROLOGICAL AND BIOLOGICAL DISEASES/DISORDERS. Look at the TIMELINE of autism: one case in WWI a number in Europe during WWII–seen by Hans Asperger in Europe and in children of returning vets by Dr. Leo Kanner in U.S.A. –then 27% in the Thalidomide disaster–then it takes off during the Vietnam War and has been traced back to dioxin in the agent orange defoliant used to destroy the jungles so the Viet Cong could be detected. Examine the high correlation between the use of these agents and the rise of autism that definitely points to causation. Although Sir Harold Evans lost his job and was persecuted by the EXPERTS when he said Thalidomide was causing the children to be born without arms and legs–
Evans went on to prove it and was knighted by the Queen. The big question was: HOW MANY PARENTS OF THE “THALIDOMIDE” children were missing arms and legs? NONE. So, it could not be genetic. Now, how many parents of children with autism are autistic? NONE. So, it cannot be genetic–it has to be caused by external insult. Base Gagetown, Oromocto, New Brunswick, Canada has been a laboratory of illnesses and disorders including autism traced back to the 1960’s (particularly 1966 and 1967) when Agent Orange (dioxin) was sprayed experimentally before being taken to Vietnam (after dioxin was used in weed killers, garbage incinerators, to bleach paper etc etc. besides it went into the rivers, streams, lakes etc., the cows ate the grass–the mother’s gave the milk to their children etc etc.). I was a journalist there I SAW THE SPRAYING. We thought it was for mosquitos. The connection was made in 1981 while I was researching teratogens and birth defects. Our main problem today is with governments who allow trans-national corporations to dump these toxins in the interest of industry and profit.
Why is the medical field called the PRACTICE of medicine> Because hypothesis/theory changes when there is empirical evidence
There are many diseases that can be linked to specific genes yet not be phenotypically expressed in the parents. Diseases that are autosomal recessive require two mutant alleles (i.e. copies) to become present and manifest symptoms – parents typically only possess one allele and are asymptomatic. Examples include cystic fibrosis and sickle cell anemia. Mutations can also occur spontaneously through the same process that drives evolution (inaccurate replication of DNA). For instance, osteogenesis imperfecta or brittle bone disease is thought to occur 25% of the time from spontaneous mutations. A third concept is that of incomplete penetrance – BRCA1 and BRCA2 are tumor suppressor genes the mutation of which dramatically increases an individual’s risk of developing breast cancer (and other cancers but not everyone with the mutation develops breast cancer (50-90% off the top of my head depending on the source). That is a basic concept of genetics that you seem to not have encountered in pursuit of your eight degrees. How many were in the biological sciences, exactly? Regarding autism in particular, there is thought to be both a genetic component and an environmental component: agent orange could be an environmental cause of autism (among many others) but the parent’s lack of autism does not preclude a genetic cause – and many studies directly contradict your assertion.
Funny that this “autism gene” made one recorded presentation in WW1–a few in Europe (called Asperger which was classified in DSM as a form of autism in 1994) and seen in the children of returning vets from WW11 and then, the escalation during the Vietnam war. The correlation between toxins such as dioxin, and benzene and others used in the “bouncing bombs” during WWII and the spraying in Oromocto cannot be dismissed and IT DOES POINT TO CAUSATION. But time will tell–it always does. However, seeing that these toxins are not just a problem with autism but with cancers and other disorders/illnesses WE SHOULD ALL BE CONCERNED AND WANTING THESE TOXIC AGENTS PROHIBITED. At least, you have not ruled it out. We will see. Dr. Olga Graham.
Do not forget LEAD Poisoning…..Starting back in WWI…
That is right. Also, lead poisoning in London Ontario of children who went to CPRI for diagnoses and ended up ingesting paint chips that were falling off the walls and becoming acc
to continue: the children became severely lead- poisoned. One case study in the book: Autism: The Teratogen Fallout,spent ten years at CPRI being chelated of the excessive lead. Then, it was discovered that the lead poisoning was superiimposed on the basic problem when this child was sprayed with agent orange (dioxin) in utero in Oromocto, New Brunswick.
Dr. Graham, surely you realize that even the strongest correlation has only limited value. It may suggest causation, but until experimental verification is uncovered correlation alone is all we are left with. To paraphrase a saying that fits here: the history of science is littered with the corpses of all sorts of beautiful hypotheses – correlations that just had to be true because they seemed to mesh potential cause and effect so beautifully and obviously – all slain by ugly experimental facts.
If you look over Dr. Seneff’s material, her linkages seem (to me at least) to go well beyond autism to a host of other disorders as well. The more exceptional hypotheses are, the stronger the experimental verification that is needed to support them. Perhaps I missed something, but in my perusal of her material all I saw was rather convoluted hypotheses. How her “review” articles got published with such a large ratio of raw conjecture to experimental results is a mystery to me. Including the published results of others in a hypothesis is certainly necessary and quite common, but any supposed linkage (no matter how tempting) requires independant additional support. If fact A is supported by prior experiment, and fact B is as well, that’s all well and good, but it in no way automatically supports some additional conjectured linkage between them, and suggesting otherwise is not science.
Time will tell. Autism causation went from thinking it was childhood schizophrenia to cold mothers which were proven invalid. The parents of children with autism are not autistic and the correlation between toxins such as dioxin and benzene2,4-D is too strong to dismiss–also, the timeline: WW I, WW II, Vietnam War–weed killers with dioxin etc.
The study suggests the need for the matter to be investigated further.
An alternate theory suggests that, in part, one reason of the propagation of Aspergers is simply that couple who would have been unlikely to find each other, much less marry each other, are living in a time when obvious career choices lead these people to meet. I work in IT and a number of these folks would appear to ‘be on the spectrum’. If we assume a genetic basis for autism / Aspergers, then when guys and gals who very detailed oriented, socially awkward computer nerds, EEs, etc go to school with each other, work together and socialize in the same group, they tend to find each other interesting. The dude who works 50 hours a week programming and goes home and builds computers, plays with drones and goes the Magic the Gathering Tournaments is MUCH MORE likely to marry the quiet bookish girl who is programming in the cube next to him than the girl he meets at the church social or at happy hour. (not a stereotype, been doing this for a couple decades, it is the world i live in). To each other, they are interesting, thoughtful people. To the rest of the world, they are geeks and nerds. I am not saying they WILL produce an autistic child, I am saying they are much more likely than the general population to be on the autism spectrum and if they reproduce, they are much more likely to produce a child on the spectrum. Assume that 100 years ago these folks would be less likely to reproduce the the general population and assume that that 100 years ago there were few or no female engineers working along side male engineer and zero programmers of either sex.
While I cannot cite the authors and I probably have not done justice to their theory, my experience tells me that the idea has basis in observable fact. I do not discount environmental factors such as Round Up impacting the incidence of autism – I just see nothing but conjecture here.
“Experts” thought that hand-washing to prevent the spread of disease in the health professions was silly too. I’d hold off judgement one way or the other, until I looked at the actual data.
I am astonished at the vitriol that I encounter from experts when anyone puts forth any thesis that is critical of industry and that displays less than abject deference to the pronouncements of ordained experts, especially, as is often the case, from people like. Mr. Mars 72, whose expertise is only tangentially relevant to the issue in question.
It’s one thing to have silly know-it-alls pretending that the world doesn’t understand the difference between correlation and causation. (Perhaps Micah would like to email Sennet with a tutorial. I’m sure it would be a revelation.) It’s another to encounter this hyper-aggressive, hyper-defensive attitude from anyone who feels their turf has been stepped on.
Methinks Mr. Mars protests too much. I get the feeling that a lot of these people are a tad on edge that their research is wholly a subsidiary of big industry. That Mars wishes to silence mainly the lingering doubts in his own mind about the integrity of the interests he can’t help but serve as an academic researcher.
Vitrol? Lol, and I thought I was taking pains to be nice! And you are correct about my expertise being tangential to the topic, no argument there. So is Dr Seneff’s. I certainly wouldn’t have had the hutzpah to make the loose connections she has, and try to pass it off in a scientific journal as “research,” which in a strict scientific sense it most certainly is not. I can see where scientific criticism might indeed seem “hyper-aggressive,” especially to someone who (I assume?) is not trained in science, and especially in cases like this where the associations being made are (to paraphrase your terminology) “hyper-ridiculous.” There might not be much cause and effect established by Dr. Seniff’s experiment-free publications and talks, but there most certainly is in regard to the response they solicit. To wit: the more ridiculous someone’s published pseudoscientific musings become, the more “hypercritical” the response will be – and should be. Thanks for the free psychoanalysis by the way, but my my only interest in all this is an abiding disgust with pseudoscience and the harm it does to society. Making up facts, or interweaving established facts in unsubstantiated ways, may win one money, fame and literature prizes for good fiction, but it is not a legitimate form of science.
Go to website: www.agentorangecanada.com and also read the book, Autism: The Teratogen Fallout ISBN 978-0-9689383-1-7 for well documented details on autism with government documents never before published.
You mean go to YOUR website and buy YOUR book, don’t you? Because ya know, YOU don’t have any agenda, right?
jakeshadows: You do not have to do anything. Actually, it is not MY website. The book is well-documented information from research. You could do your own research. Yes, I have an agenda. It is to inform the inhabitants of the planet, Earth, that there are toxins being dumped on the planet that are dangerous to human health and we need to prohibit these in the interest of human health and lives–not to mention plant and animal.
Sure I can do research. As a scientist, I’m more qualified than you are – you’re degreed in things like sociology, psychology, English, etc. You have very little in the way of hard sciences. The MIT scientist is little better and has been long debunked.
jakeshadow: Like Aaron Kase, I am a journalist. My job is to report on what is happening. In the case of autism and dioxin
In the case of autism and the correlation etc., with dioxin– I was there. I reported on what happened and backed it up with other research reports. You are a scientist your job is to tell us how it happens. Like Aaron Kase, I am a journalist, I report on what happened. Please write your book, I will be happy to review it.–as other journalists I am sure. The issue here is not to compete with each other and criticize each other but to make discoveries and stop the dumping of toxins on the planet. I do not know your age–but at mine, I do not have too long left here–so soon, this will not be my problem, but think of the children coming to Earth after we have left it.
If they have to dress like that to use/handle the spray–should we be inhaling and eating it?
your point is invalid , people who handle any agricultural pesticide/herbicide be it synthetic or organic have to wear protective gear for once because they come in concentrated form , constantly touching a toxic liquid can be absorbed by the skin , lungs etc…
once diluted and prepped for spraying, it’s strenght/toxicity is minuscule compared to it’s concentrate state.. for high volume application you mix 10mL Roundup per litre of water.. see the difference ? 1-1000
“Use recommended
rates of Roundup specified in this label up to a maximum limit of 4L/ha” I’ll let you do the math to see what that adds up to
OK. YOU GO AHEAD AND HAVE FUN USING IT.
how infantile…
Time will tell.
The Doc is getting closer. I wouldn’t lay a blanket and say all GMOs are bad as genetically selecting characteristics is natural, but specific chemicals Monsanto uses are 100% going to have a toxic affect. glyphosate may be toxic to us but we need more research. Also, Monsanto needs to stop bullying the world. thats a different point though.
glyphosate–dioxins-benzene-2,4-D….AND let us not confuse genetic and hereditary….
Interesting to listen in on this very interesting–though not to the point–discussion about everything except the rising autism rates. Dr. Stephanie Seneff is an MIT scientist. She has done her research and is showing good reason to consider glyphosate a prime culprit in the rise of autism in our children. What I would like to know is how close a connection to Monsanto do each of you respondents have? There are many other studies that indict glyphosate as a risk to human health and animal health. This is just one more nail in the coffin–but will it be more human coffins or will it be the last nail for glyphosate? It is high time that we all wake up to the damage this is doing to all of us and to our environment at large.
Wow, lots of negative comments here, but I’ll bet most of you believe the woman who injects her face with botox’s claim that vaccines cause autism is real. We wouldn’t want to get the word out that maybe, just MAYBE everything Monsanto is doing IS harming our future so why not get the word out?
My previous post , partially reposted here, was removed with no notification to me nor any excuse offered. I thought it was perfectly reasonable and unoffensive. Other posts of mine relating to it were kept. Gee, I wonder why? So, one more time with feeling (without the previous lead in paragraph):
“Dr. Seneff has, according to her Vita and information listed on the MIT CSAIL website, a strong record of research of which she can be justifiably proud, but it’s mostly involved with the interfacing of language with computer technology. How one segues from that to being an “expert” in biochemistry and molecular biology isn’t clear to me at all.
The history of Biology includes lots of examples of people with expertise in one area who get themselves into trouble when they use their reputation in that area as a license to make unfounded pronouncements in another area in which they have little real experience. This even extends to Nobel laureates, hence we have Dr. Linus Pauling and his assertions that vitamin C is an immune booster, etc., in spite of a lack of supporting experimental evidence. Similarly, Dr. Seneff’s recent articles in the Entropy On-line Journal are listed as “reviews.” How does one get to write reviews in areas where one has no established experience? That’s a new one on me. Upon examination her “reviews” are little more than the findings of others loosely strung together in highly questionable ways to arrive at conclusions about human health that in fact are little more than elaborate hypotheses with no obvious direct experimental support. Pigs exist and birds can fly; no one would refute these assertions, but if I connect the topics and assert that I believe pigs can fly, I had better provide some experimental verifiable evidence that goes well beyond the mere existence of pigs and flight.
A recent paper that included a critique of Dr. Seneff’s “work” in the Journal of Medical Toxicology (2014) 10:194-201, titled, “Tempest in a Tea Pot: How did the Public Conversation
on Genetically Modified Crops Drift so far from the Facts?,” by Daniel A. Goldstein included this quote:
“One can also get traction simply by spinning unfounded theories. For example, Samsel and Seneff [67], neither of whom has any background in the biological sciences, published an article in a physics journal (Entropy) arguing that GM crops and associated pesticides act via “exogenous semiotic entropy” and lead to most of the dis- eases and conditions associated with a Western diet, including gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depres- sion, autism, infertility, cancer, and Alzheimer’s disease. Their arguments were quickly rejected and derided, but not before they gained a large amount of press and provided support to the many unfounded fears of GMO’s.”
Dr. Seneff’s “research” is not research in the full sense of the word, not even close, and in the absence of expertise in biology I fail to see how her unsupported hypotheses – regardless of the story they seem to weave – can be taken seriously. The layman may be impressed by the shear volume of information she strings together (one pdf file I looked at had over 100 PowerPoint slides in it) but volume is no substitute for experimental verification of all of those questionable connections she makes. Any one of those connections would take a significant effort to support, but those with little actual lab experience of course wouldn’t understand that.
None of this is intended as an ad-hominem attack on Dr. Seneff or her colleagues ( though some seem to have equally questionable credentials). Science is not designed to be a personally friendly undertaking. Scientists are trained to be super-critical of their own work as well as that of others. In this area if one has the audacity to put forth unsubstantiated drivel, harsh responses are inevitable, and in a very real sense required.”
The thing that disturbs me most are how often comments here are deleted. It would seem the moderators do not appreciate dissenting comments. It’s the same on the Facebook page. Dissenters are banned from commenting. If Amber and so many like her are want the truth to be known, then they should not be afraid of any discourse or discussion. A challenge to an idea that is successfully met will only strengthen it and her actions seem to be of fear that her ideas/arguments aren’t up to such scrutiny.
Autism is a disease that has been invented, not discovered. Although there may be cause for diagnosing certain individuals with severe Autism, generally it is my belief that Autism is a counter-productive label applied to those apertures of consciousness (read: individuals) who don’t conform to old social standards. Who has the ability to judge whether or not a person is able to fit in?
The human species is evolving, culturally, at an increasing rate. And it has been changing now faster than it ever has in human history. Labels like “autism” are growing pains of this change. The future is exciting because things are changing quickly, but on the negative/realistic side, we might all be extinct soon.
LOL
Dr. Olga, your response diminishes you.
I, once, was a special ed. teacher who worked in a State Psychiatric Hospital. When my son was young ( i was an another field by that time) the public school worked very to give him an ‘austim’ or ‘aspergers’ Dx. I took him to a private dr. (PhD from Cornell) who dismissed the idea. Today my son is the top of his class and has top test scores. He is reasonably social. While Stefan’s point of view may not explain all of the increase in the occurrence of autism over the decades, it does indeed carry a lot of merit.
Autism is a neurological disorder in the communication area of the brain seen on MRI’s. However, because of neuroplasticity, the brain tries to compensate for the injury and throws development on other areas of the brain, hence the reason many with autism are savants. People with autism are not retarded–in fact, most are brilliant. I do agree with Dr. Stefan. I also note your comment about your son being “reasonably social” this is a symptom that all persons with autism share–problems in the socializing area. A good author to read is Dr. Temple Grandin who wrote man books such as “Thinking in Pictures” as most autistic persons think and learn through visual methodology. Dr. Grandin is afflicted with autism. Grandin is brilliant, but she will tell you she still has autism. I am happy for you and your son and thankful he might just be low on the spectrum. I cannot judge–I do not know your son. But autism comes with specific behaviours if you know what to look for–you will not miss.
In essence when a butterfly is removed too early from its cocoon or if system growth is interrupted by any outside added “thing” whatever it may be… we get unwelcome outcomes; autism and many other dis – eases.
Anyone notice the top 2 ingredients in infant formula? Corn and soy. In 2014, GMO crops made up 94 percent of US soybean acreage, and 93 percent of all corn planted. Any questions?
To anyone reading these comments: If you see a response that is pro-roundup, click on that user’s profile, and see if they post about other topics, or just things pertaining to Monstanto. They have a TON of paid trolls who go crazy on the comments section of stories like this. This story is no exception. Again – CLICK ON THEIR PROFILE AND SEE IF THEY ARE A SHILL. Prepare to be disgusted.
After reading about Dr. Stephanie Seneff I now understand a lot more of why Carnegie Mellon is crushing MIT in AI development.
So…… Monasanto is a captain planet villain?
That’s very inept of you. If that were true we would have seen almost every person on Earth having autism before the 20th century started. Nice try but learn how to play the game first.
Since she’s from Nerd Central, I assume this means she’s pro-glyphosate.
I’m autistic by myself, and since magic mushrooms have helped me to improve my situation (I’m able to look people in the eyes – since January 2013, with the age of 43) , I think, the woman is nearby, but it is no glyphosphate.
The reason for autism is an intoxication with lysergic acid alkaloids from ergot.
Autism has increased in the USA because of GMO-wheat:
“Two of four GM lines showed up … a 40-fold increase of infection with ergot disease Claviceps purpurea compared with their control lines in the field experiment …” (Zeller, Sl. et. al.: Transgene x environment interactions in genetically modified wheat. PLoS One. 2010)
How it goes:
If the mother eat ergot containig grains the lysergic acid from ergot circulates in the bloodstream of the mother and the embryo. Some embryos falsely think, that the lysergic acid from ergot ist an natural part of human’s body. Then the immune system of the embryo and later the child don’t fight against the ergot alkaloids. In this case the lysergic acid alkaloids enriches in the body of the child, before and after birth. After some time there is enough, that it leads to both pain and failures of perception – what we call autism.
In this sence autism is like always on LSD, a bad trip that never ends.
We have another battle to fight first. Unfortunately, nothing is organic anymore. The Military Industrial Complex is spraying Aluminum, Barium and Strontium into the atmosphere around the globe. They are trying to kill us off. Monsanto has developed Aluminum resistant seeds…hmmm. Let’s work together and fight. Go to this reliable site for more info https://www.facebook.com/dane.wigington.geoengineeringwatch.org
Really guys? Just by the title of the talk itself, I know she is right!
Here is her incredibly convincing presentation on the matter, this bit link starts the video at the correct place.
http://bit.ly/glyphoautism
glyphosate was originally used as a chelating chemical to clean mineral deposits before being used as an herbicide.
glyphosate was patented as an anti biotic in 2010.
people are eating it on a daily basis
https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/glyphosate-the-new-bogeyman/
The pathway in the good bacteria is interrupted, the bacteria dies, our immune system weakens and autism blooms. We are out of balance, our nervous system is not being protected by the good bacteria as it once was, and becomes vulnerable to damage and, therefore, malfunctions.
Years ago it was explained that GMOs alter the configuration of the plant’s molecules. Each plant has a specific configuration (like a gear) that fits in…locks into… our cells to transfer nutrition. The alteration disallows the transfer of nutrients because the gears do not interlock anymore. The “food” cannot do its work in us. It is designed for something other than the human body. If we are not receiving all the necessary nutrients, our bodies cannot function as designed. There is a very specific and delicate system at work which was not carefully considered by GMO’s and Monsanto. Money became the specific consideration.
Lets do a study of 200 pregnant women. Feed half GMO’s and half organic then continue with the same food for the children until they finish high school. GMO’s and non GMO’s are basically the same ( except that a GMO’s can be repeatedly sprayed with pesticides and not die) but they are basically the same. So let’s get people to step up and volunteer their wives and daughters to bring this experiment to a scientific conclusion.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2014/12/31/oh-no-gmos-are-going-to-make-everyone-autistic/
This article is the very essence of junk “science”.
senior research scientist at the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory? I am just saying that maybe if she was a Biologist or something it would be more realistic. I may be a Mechanical Engineer so I can make claims about Global Warming and Outer Space too? With that said I do believe GMO’s, Roundup, and Monsanto are all bad for everyone, but not because of what she said.
http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/glyphosate.asp
One in 68 families has an autistic child to raise. This is equivalent to or even worse than the AIDS epidemic in the 80’s because the people don’t die, they live on and cause an enormous drain of medical expenses, not to mention emotional strain… and it’s silent. We need to ACT UP for these resilient warriors who quietly deal with the devastation of their situation.
Here is one father’s heartbreaking story:
https://www.facebook.com/AutismMothers/videos/10153464229807653/
There was no autism epidemic, libtards. Only hysteria and a biased narrative.
This makes sense.
Now the Monsanto trolls are out in force. You know, it’s really too late. There is so much evidence out there already about the toxic damage Monsanto has been doing to our planet for decades. PCB’s, millions of tons of chemical pesticides, gmo’s… talk about a predatory company in the business of killing. Their “products” kill everything from people (and don’t forget Agent Orange) to wildlife (and don’t forget DDT), to the soil our food is grown in. It’s in the air, the water, breast milk, 90% of the ppl who took the glyphosate test. This company is a menace, and it (and its ilk) needs to be shut down and all its assets shared among those who are damaged. I’m sick of the pathological greed of these kind of companies and the destruction and misery they cause. Monsanto Must Die.
so now computer programmers are biologists? where are the creds, there is nothing here that is relevant